Hot Potato Mash

Bush's RACIST Civil Rights Division at Justice Department

NEW VIDEO UPDATE AT BOTTOM OF POST

People have often asked me whether I felt even the slightest guilt for my role in John Tanner losing his job as the Voting Section Chief of the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice at the end of 2007. Briefly, I videotaped Tanner making racist and untrue comments about Photo ID laws which led to embarrassing Congressional hearings and his resignation. The Washington Post's Dana Milbank would later tell MSNBC's Dan Abrams that Tanner had to be "cut loose because of [that] one bad line" captured on videotape.

Well, today the DoJ released a report that contained a few nuggets about John Tanner. For example:

In that incident in August 2004, Voting Section Chief John Tanner sent an e-mail to Schlozman asking Schlozman to bring coffee for him to a meeting both were scheduled to attend. Schlozman replied asking Tanner how he liked his coffee. Tanner's response was, "Mary Frances Berry style-- black and bitter."

Berry is an African-American who was the Chairperson of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights from November 1993 until late 2004.

Only in the perverse Bush administration could you have a bunch of racists in charge of civil rights at the DoJ. For much more on the racism at DoJ and the Justice report in general, see Brad's latest post or watch the Olbermann video above. The Tanner racism stuff begins at the 4:00 mark.

BTW, I have never felt even remotely guilty about Tanner's forced resignation.

UPDATE: A great video about Tanner from TPM...

Don Siegelman Interview on 'Stolen Elections' and Karl Rove's Contempt

The Brad Blog's Brad Friedman interviewed former Alabama governor Don Siegelman at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday August 27, 2008. The excellent exchange (6:14) includes the following choice quotes:

On Rove: "If we do not vote the contempt citation, Karl Rove is simply going to get in his getaway car and thumb his nose at the Constitution, Congress, and the American people. It creates almost two systems of justice: one for the powerful, those connected to the White House, and then another system for you and me and the rest of the people."

On Democrats: "Democrats are so magnanimous in victory, as they were after Watergate, they did nothing. After the Iran-Contra scandal, they did nothing. But what Democrats are going to want to do is get on with positive programs, to fix the damage that has been done by the Bush administration...But I view this as part of that positive change. Finding out who hijacked the Department of Justice and who used it as a political weapon."

On his 'stolen' 2002 election: "I went to bed the winner. The media had been sent home. The poll-workers had been sent home. The party chairmen had been given their copies of the election results. And then after midnight a light went on in the basement of the capitol, the basement of the courthouse, in the sheriff's office, and 5,200 votes that were mine were shifted to my opponent."

See Hot Potato Mash's entire Don Siegelman coverage.

MUST WATCH STOLEN ELECTION/DEMOCRACY VIDEOS

First up is the newly released free online documentary "Free For All" (the entire movie is available for download here). The flick, which is written, produced and directed by John Wellington Ennis, is not only informative but hugely entertaining.

Next up is a clip (7:04) about Clint Curtis from the excellent election documentary, Uncounted, The New Math of American Elections, by David Earnhardt. Curtis has testified under oath that he was hired by hella corrupt Florida Republican Congressman Tom Feeney to create vote flipping computer software in order to steal elections.

FYI: Brad Blog's Brad Friedman figures prominently in both documentaries.

VIDEO EXCLUSIVE: Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader Says A Close Election Will Be Decided By Political Parties

Presidential candidate Ralph Nader held a press conference in Los Angeles on Saturday where I asked him on behalf of Brad Blog about whether the upcoming election would turn out any differently than the 2004 election which Nader believes was hijacked by the Republican Party and the 2000 election which the Supreme Court decided. The video is above (2:37) and the transcript of our exchange follows below:

Alan: In 2004 you said that the Republican Party was able to “steal the election before election day” and that the “election was hijacked from A to Z”. And in 2000 the Supreme Court decided the election. Do you have any reason to believe that 2008 will turn out any differently.

Ralph Nader: If the 2008 election comes down to one or two states that are very close in the polls between the candidates, the way you can predict the outcome is simply to ask one question – who controls the state government. If it’s the Republican Party or if it’s the Democratic Party. Whoever controls the state government can maneuver a win whether by the distribution or maldistribution of voting machines, deregistering people, all kinds of ways. There are now 50, 100 ways that the state government in a close election can throw the election in the direction of the party that that state government reflects.

And so to answer your question, if it comes down to that close margin, whether it’s Florida or Ohio, they can do it again. But Ohio is now Democrat. Florida is still Republican.

We have a political system that is vulnerable to continual theft, to continual confusion for the voters, to continual failure to keep an accurate paper trail in order to double check.

Why don’t we simply adopt the Canadian system where in that vast country they have a paper ballot, they have small precincts with no more than 500 voters, and by 11pm that night they know who won and who lost. And if there are any questions, the paper ballots are the verifiable material.

Why are we into this huge electronic miasma with different kinds of machines? Why? Because it is big business. Because it is a procurement item that is growing by the billions every four years. And whenever you get a procurement item that interferes with election integrity you have politicians that are crooked and companies that seduce them into this kind of dishonesty.

And it isn’t just taking money. It is dishonesty in not having the best available electoral technology or electoral ways of counting votes accurately.

The entire press conference (31:06) with Ralph Nader and his running mate Matt Gonzalez

“The Good Fight: Declare Your Independence and Close the Democracy Gap” (Ralph Nader)

Cross-posted at Brad Blog

Technorati Tags: democracy, democrats, election, Matt Gonzalez, recession, republican

Anyone Know If We Are Still At War?

It appears that Hot Potato Mash has more Iraq war coverage than the mainstream media. From today's New York Times:

The three broadcast networks’ nightly newscasts devoted more than 4,100 minutes to Iraq in 2003 and 3,000 in 2004, before leveling off at about 2,000 a year, according to Andrew Tyndall, who monitors the broadcasts and posts detailed breakdowns at tyndallreport.com. And by the last months of 2007, he said, the broadcasts were spending half as much time on Iraq as earlier in the year.

Since the start of last year, the Project for Excellence in Journalism, a part of the nonprofit Pew Research Center, has tracked reporting by several dozen major newspapers, cable stations, broadcast television networks, Web sites and radio programs. Iraq accounted for 18 percent of their prominent news coverage in the first nine months of 2007, but only 9 percent in the following three months, and 3 percent so far this year. (emphasis is mine)

The policy debate in Washington that dominated last year’s Iraq coverage has almost disappeared from the news. And reporting on events in Iraq has fallen by more than two-thirds from a year ago.

Clearly the MSM just doesn't care about our soldiers fighting and dying in Iraq. Soldiers like Tomas Young seen in the two videos below and the soon to be released documentary “Body of War”. For more on Young see my post at Brad Blog.

Part 1 (9:03)

Part 2 (5:30)


(h/t Dredd)

Technorati Tags: iraq, msm, Tomas Young

VIDEO: Election Integrity Advocates Speak At Historic California Hearing On Voting Problems

Brad Friedman, publisher of The BRAD BLOG and other Election Integrity advocates spoke at the historic Joint Informational Hearing Discussion Of Problems Faced By Voters At The 2008 Presidential Primary Election held in Los Angeles on Friday (the “Double Bubble” Hearing). However, Brad almost did not get a chance to say his piece as the Sergeant At Arms nearly tossed him out of the hearing on multiple occasions for applauding (video below, 2:20):

Despite his disruptive antics, Brad was eventually allowed to speak to the panel about the Los Angeles County “Double Bubble” problem (video below, 2:23)

Sheri Myers, who is an election protection activist and author of, Cheated! A Graphic Novel About The 2004 Election, wants some accountability (2:08):

Riverside County election integrity guru and friend, Tom Courbat, mashed together a video of his own evidence laden testimony at the hearing (7:25):

Ricco Ross is an actor, a leading progressive Los Angeles based activist, the famous owner of the impeachmobile and a friend (4:08):

California Senator Jenny Oropeza, who was an amazing advocate for election integrity throughout the day, told Fox11 News after the hearing that she is “absolutely committed” to fixing the election problems seen in the primary before the November election. Later she added that, “We are going to stay on top of this like white on rice” (2:13):

Technorati Tags: Brad Friedman, Ricco Ross, Sheri Myers, Tom Courbat

Bonus 'Bush League Justice' Segment On Tanner Resignation

Former DoJ attorney David Becker and The Washington Post's Dana Milbank joined Dan Abrams on MSNBC to discuss the resignation of John Tanner as chief of the voting section of the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department. Throughout their conversation all three repeatedly credit Tanner's ridiculous comments at the National Latino Congreso, which I caught on video and reported about with Brad Friedman at The Brad Blog, for his downfall:

Milbank: “This guy simply became too difficult to handle, not  necessarily because of the policies you've been talking about, but because of that one line.”

Milbank: “Let's remember, he was sort of abused before this committee in the House, they wanted him to come before this committee to explain his record, to explain the Georgia Voter ID law. The Justice Department wasn't letting him go. Then he let his mouth slip. Then they let him go. They weren't apologizing for the record here, they were saying, well, we're gonna have to cut him loose because of this one bad line.”

Abrams: “Right. And this is the line about saying, ”white people tend to live longer“.

Abrams: ”The bottom line is that it is this comment in conjunction with the fact that everything they have done in the voting rights section is consistent with a guy who says things like, “white people live longer”, and that's the reason this is significant.“

Becker: ”Yeah, it's nice that they are now, once they get caught, concerned about the feelings of voters whose feelings they might hurt...

Well thank you very much!

JOHN TANNER RESIGNS!!!!!!!

The chief of the DoJ's Civil Rights Division, Voting Section, John Tanner, who was thrust into the national spotlight after making absurd comments about minorities that were caught on videotape by yours truly and reported about by myself and Brad Friedman over at The Brad Blog in October, resigned today. 

After Tanner's comments garnered some limited coverage from the mainstream media, Brad and Paul Kiel at TPM Muckraker kept up the pressure on Tanner by breaking new stories about other Tanner shenanigans. By the end of the month, Tanner was compelled to testify before the House Judiciary subcommittee where his dismal performance led the Washington Post to call him “one sorry man”.

Tanner's comments eventually led to calls for his firing from Barack Obama, Rep. Jerrod Nadler (D-NY), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), the DNC and many more civil rights organizations.

And now Tanner's reign of disenfranchising Democratic leaning voters is over. Yet, my enthusiasm is tempered, like that of Barack Obama, who remains upset that Tanner was not fired but reassigned:

“It's unacceptable that the Administration is simply shuffling deck chairs by moving Mr. Tanner to another important position in the Justice Department.  During his tenure, he made offensive, intolerant comments about minorities in an attempt to defend voter identification laws that threaten voting rights, and that's why I called on him to be fired. It's time we restore confidence in the Department by appointing public servants who are truly committed to upholding our civil rights.”

And we still do not know who will replace Tanner in the Voting Section at DoJ where his two top disciples remain. Still, this story is proof positive that a citizen journalist/blogger can make a difference. And I'd like to believe that a few more votes will get counted in 2008 as a result.

Brad has much much more.

Bush League Justice Series

MSNBC's Live With Dan Abrams ran a four-part series this week titled, “Bush League Justice”, which investigated the administration's abuse of the Department of Justice to expand its power.

Day 1 - Bush Administration's Use Of The DoJ To Expand Its Own Power

The series began with a look into the “department's almost unrecognizable Civil Rights Division” and even includes a snippet of my infamous John Tanner video (without credit!) first posted and reported about on The Brad Blog.

Day 2 - Bush Administration's 'Unprecedented Use' of Signing Statements To Subvert The Law

A signing statement is a president's written interpretation of legislation passed by congress which accompanies his signature when he signs a bill into law. Bush has used signing statements almost twice as much as all the presidents that preceded him combined and has often done so to circumvent the law.

For example, in 2005 congress voted overwhelmingly to ban torture which Bush signed into law. However, Bush also included a signing statement which basically allowed him to ignore the new law.

Day 3 - Partisan Investigations and Prosecutions

Despite the overwhelming criminality of Republicans since Bush was gift wrapped the White House by the Supreme Court, Democrats have been investigated and prosecuted at nearly six times the rate of Republicans at the federal level.

Day 4 - The Controversial Prosecution Of Former Democratic Alabama Governor Don Siegelman

Evidence suggests that Siegelman, who remains in prison, was wrongly prosecuted by prominent Alabama Republicans with the help of Karl Rove.

Dan Abrams concludes the series by stating, “Now while this was the last episode of this series, our ”Bush League“ investigations are far from over. A new Attorney General has taken over. We are going to be watching very closely. The days of Justice Department malfeasance remaining under the mainstream media radar are over. You are on notice.”

VIDEOS: Bill O'Reilly Targets Mark Cuban In Latest Joseph McCarthy Act

Who needs Joseph McCarthy when you have Bill O'Reilly? O'Reilly's latest and greatest victim is Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban who, according to O'Reilly, should be imprisoned.

The original attack came Monday night, undoubtedly because Mark Cuban called the demagogue a “moron” in response to a Brad Friedman question at BlogWorld last week.

A mashup (5:08) of O'Reilly's attacks on Cuban on Tuesday.

Keith Olbermann puts the O'Reilly smears in context.

KO interviews conservative constitutional lawyer, Bruce Fein, about the legal b.s. being spewed by Bill-O.

UPDATE: O'REILLY ATTACKS CUBAN FOR THIRD STRAIGHT DAY

O'Reilly brings Dennis Miller into the ring to further his attacks on Mark Cuban.

MSNBC's Dan Abrams smacks O'Reilly good in just a half a minute (0:41).

UPDATE 2: KO KO's Fox 'News' and O'reilly

Brad has more.

VIDEO INTERVIEW EXCLUSIVE: Scott Gant, Author Of 'We're All Journalists Now'

Cross-posted at BRAD BLOG

Are bloggers journalists? More importantly, should bloggers receive the same privileges the government bestows upon “professional” journalists including, in most states, protection from the forced disclosure of confidential sources of information by way of shield laws?

These are some of the questions congress has been considering over the last month as part of the “Free Flow of Information Act of 2007” and which BRAD BLOG, which often relies on confidential and whistleblower sources, has been tracking closely.

With this backdrop, BRAD BLOG jumped at the opportunity to interview the guy who literally wrote the book on the subject -- D.C. constitutional law attorney Scott Gant. Released in June, “We're All Journalists Now: The Transformation of the Press and Reshaping of the Law in the Internet Age” (Scott Gant), has enjoyed favorable reviews and led to appearances by Gant on BookTV and  on The McLaughlin Group, where the host commented that the book was “a great read, an easy read and it breaks new ground, quite groundbreaking.”

Part 1 (7:32) of the interview above covers all things related to the shield law.

 

Part 2 (8:30) of the interview above concentrates on access privileges and other benefits that journalists receive from the government that may be important to bloggers.

“We're All Journalists Now: The Transformation of the Press and Reshaping of the Law in the Internet Age” (Scott Gant)

One Sorry Man

Often hysterical and always on target coverage by Dana Milbank of The Washington Post on John Tanner's pathetic performance in front of the House Judiciary subcommittee yesterday.

Brad has more

.

NewsHour Extensively Covers Tanner Hearings

PBS' NewsHour ran an excellent five minute segment on the Tanner hearings yesterday, even showing the original video with Brad Blog attribution! View the transcript or view the entire NewsHour program here.

Tanner Slammed In House Hearings Spurred By HPM/Brad Blog Original Report

John Tanner, the voting section chief of the Justice Department Civil Rights Division was the star witness in House hearings yesterday spurred by my original video footage and blog post (with much heavy lifting and additional reporting from Brad Friedman). As the two short videos below illustrate, Tanner was smacked hard by Artur Davis (D-Alabama) and Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota,) leading to more calls for his resignation.

 
Rep. Artur Davis questions Tanner

Rep. Keith Ellison questions Tanner

Brad has much much more on yesterday's hearing including a post on the lack of attribution from the mainstream press for our original report and a post which includes the entire post hearing statement from John Conyers (D-Michigan), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Finally, be sure to check out Brad's live blogging post which covers the entire hearing.

“What Went Wrong In Ohio: The Conyers Report On The 2004 Presidential Election” (Congressman John Conyers)

“The Constitution in Crisis: The High Crimes of the Bush Administration and a Blueprint for Impeachment” (John C. Conyers)

Rep. Nadler Calls For Firing of DoJ Voting Rights Section Chief Tanner

Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) called for the firing of John Tanner - the head of the Voting Rights section of the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department - because of the prejudicial comments he made at the National Latino Congreso that I captured on video and posted at The BRAD BLOG. In the video Tanner acknowledges that Photo ID laws do disenfranchise elderly voters but do not disproportionately impact minority voters because they “don’t become elderly the way white people do; they die first.”

Appearing with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now on October 24, 2007, Nadler stated:

Well, he should certainly be fired, obviously. Obviously, someone who has such prejudices has no business heading the Voting Rights section or any other branch of the government and certainly not being on the Federal Voting Commission, which is supposed to enforce our election laws and our voting rights laws.

Now, Mr. Tanner, as head of the Voting Rights section, perverted the Justice Department -- or he and a few others perverted the Justice Department from seeking to protect people's civil rights and the right to vote to seeking deliberately, I believe -- and I think a number of reports have shown this -- to use the Justice Department to disenfranchise people likely to vote Democratic, specifically minorities and more elderly people. You know, here he’s admitting that procedures that he sought to put into place would discriminate against elderly people in voting, would cause valid elderly voters not to be able to vote. That’s against the law, and it obviously also should be against the policy of the United States government. But we know that the Bush administration has been using these voter ID cards, the fear of -- so far never demonstrated -- voter fraud, to put into place all sorts of new restrictions, voter ID cards, purge lists and so forth, which we know have the effect of disproportionately disenfranchising legal elderly and minority but likely-to-vote-Democratic voters.

For more on this see Brad Friedman's recent post at The BRAD BLOG.